Cop killed Brian Hundley jury found him guilty, Kav overtuned their decision

[bobbieinok]

Tweet by michaelherriot, then long thread

In the thread a reference to Kav's decision is supplied. Also some back and forth that the case was complicated

[onenote]

1. Very misleading description -- it was a civil case appealed by both sides

and the 3-judge court (Kavanaugh, Randolph and Douglas Ginsburg) ruled in favor of each side on different issues and remanded the case for a new trial.

Specifically, Brian Hundley's estate sued the officer that shot Hundley, the DC Chief of Police and the DC government for damages base on three separate causes of action. The jury found for defendants on assault and battery and excessive force claims, concluding that Officer Gaines was justified in shooting Hundley in self-defense. At the same time, however, the jury in a written interrogatory answer specifically rejected Officer Gaines’s version of events regarding the self-defense shooting. The jury found for plaintiffs on the negligence claim, concluding the initial stop was unreasonable; the jury also determined that the negligent stop proximately caused Hundley’s death. The jury awarded damages of $242,400 to plaintiffs.

On appeal, Hundley’s estate challenges the assault and battery and excessive force verdict for the defense, arguing that the jury’s verdict for defendants on those two claims was inconsistent with the jury’s written interrogatory answer, in which it directly rejected Officer Gaines’s version of events. And defendants challenge the negligence verdict, arguing that the negligent stop did not proximately cause the shooting death that formed the basis for the damages award.

The court agreed with Hundley’s estate that the jury verdict on the assault and battery and excessive force claims was inconsistent with the jury’s answer to the written interrogatory. It also agreed with defendants that the negligent stop, as a legal, not factual matter, did not proximately cause the shooting death and thus cannot justify the damages on that count. Thus, the court reversed the trial court judgment and remanded for a new trial for Hundley’s estate on the assault and battery and excessive force claims.


https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/FFAD8403BAED6190852574400045553E/$file/05-7152a.pdf

[bobbieinok]

2. Thanks for this. Tweets are too short to get much info.

[onenote]

3. You're welcome. To summarize, the jury found in favor of the cop on two counts

and in favor of the victim on one count. The appeals court reversed the two portions of the jury decision that favored the cops and also reversed the one portion that favored the victim.

[kefauver]

4. The Tweet is Accurate, Just Missing Proper Context

The tweet was not as misleading as some people believe.

Kavanaugh did indeed overturn the original jury's verdict that awarded Hundley's estate $242,000 in compensation for police negligence.

And he went into great depth on why the Hundley estate could not receive monetary compensation for police negligence - a DC law shields the police from having to pay out damages if an officer shoots someone in self-defense. Kavanaugh spent a great deal of time explaining why Hundley's situation was no exception.

Here's what doesn't check out:

1) The jury did not believe the officer's story, so whether the officer was acting in self-defense was not determined.

2) If the DC law is so clear, then why did the judge from the original case allow for the jury's compensation verdict for police negligence? Wouldn't that judge step in and overturn the verdict right there and then using Kavanaugh's logic?

It doesn't really add up.

Supposedly the Hundley estate is due for a re-trial regarding the Assault and Battery and Excessive Force charges, but the appeal before Kavanaugh & Co. occurred in 2007 and there is no word on these follow-up cases that I have read.